Thomas R. Wildeman and Michael J. Pavelich Chemistry and Geochemistry Department E. Dendy Sloan Chemical and Petroleum Refining Department Colorado Schooi of Mines Golden. Colorado 80401
The Faculty Development Program at the Colorado School of Mines
The need for faculty development programs in education exist on all college campuses. A gap exists between the formal education of most faculty and one of the major demands of their jobs, teaching. We have been well-trained as professional scientists, humanists, or engineers hut have had little or no formal training as educators. Our exposure to educational theories and practices has been limited to our experiences as students. The situation is akin to practicing psychology hased on one's experiences as a patient. The way most of us respond to this situation is to hegin our teaching careers by emulating some favorite professor. We then make adjustments over the years, sharpening our teaching skills, hased on the trial and error of experience and on ideas obtained from colleagues. In 1977, the authors began a program at the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) to meet this need of the faculty for formal development as educators. When asked to translate this need into more concrete ohjectives, we decided upon the following: 1) To establish a nucleus of faculty members who would be knowledgeable about current theory and practice of education. 2) To have this nucleus of faculty members influence educational
matters on an institutional and individual level. 3) To provide a means for professional development as an educator which is comparable to development as a researcher.
We set a period of five years for reaching these ohjectives. Three methods were chosen to meet these goals: The Seminar Series on Education, The New Faculty Workshop, and The Workshop Seminars. This paper explains the ohjectives and structure of the seminars and workshops and gives an assessment of the success of each of three methods we chose for faculty educational development. Comments on the cost of the program and the selection of speakers are given in the section on General Considerations. Finally, the section on Overall Assessment is an appraisal of how well the overall objectives have been met. Seminar Series on Education The seminars were the starting point of the development program and the sole activity for the first year. Consequently, the ohjectives of seminar series are designed to promote general participation. There are three ohjectives: (a) To raise the level of awareness of the faculty in education matters; (h) T o introduce new ideas and data on education; and (c) T o provide a relaxed atmosphere for exchange of ideas. Of the three objectives, we find the one on a relaxed atmosphere for exchanging ideas to be most important for general participation. The idea of talking about how to teach is definitely a stressful and emotional situation for some participants who consider that the teaching methods that they have been using for years may he subject to attack. A definite effort has to he made to eliminate threatening or intimidating situations. Because this objective of providing a relaxed atmosphere is important, the structure of the seminars is different from the usual scene associated with scientific talks. The situation is like a talk given at an "English Men's Club" or a traditional
Presented at the 6th Biennial Chemical Education Conference, Rochester, New York, June 1980.
faculty cluh. The room chosen for the seminars is a woodnaneled readine room nrovided with over-stuffed chairs. There is a 20 mynute s o h session before the seminar. The seminar lasts for about 40 minutes and is twicallv .. . interrunted with questions and discussion. Then, informal discussions-and socializina continue afterwards. ~ u r i n c a nacademic year, six to eight seminars are scheduled. A list of speakers and their topics is presented in Table 1. The speakers from on-campus are typically people making innovations in specific courses. The speakers from off-campus are typically college teachers who have worked on course and curriculum development or who have studied educational theories and have designed courses around those theories. The success of the Seminar Series was immediate and because of that. the seminars have been continued everv vear. Typically 30 40 faculty members attend each seminarwith 70 (about 40% of the CMS faculty) attending at least one seminar per year. One of the greatest benefits of the seminars is that they serve as excellent vehicles for interdepartment communication. What is discussed before and after the presentations is just as important as the seminar itself. It is the closest approximation on campus to a faculty cluh. Some of the ideas presented in the seminars have served as the basis for important changes in the curriculum at Mines. It has now reached the point that if faculty members are impressed with curricular ideas from some school and are considering making changes, a speaker from that school is brought in to give a L~~~~~~
~
~~
Table 1.
Seminar Speakers
Tonics
Soeakers On Campus
Testing and Exam Writing
Research Resuits an Teacher Evaluations Experimental Learning and Engineering Self-paced instruction Video Techniques in Instruction Effect ot the Instructor'sAnitude on Students Teacher-Student Interactions Using Case Studies in Technical Writing
Dickson. Chemical Engineering Winers, Chemistry Pavelich, Chemistry Sioan. Chemical Engineering Astle, Mathematics McGrath, Basic Engineering Drake, Chemistry Cochell, Mathematics Culver. Basic Engineering Hackos, Maningiy, and Bart; Humanities
Off Campus An Overview of Learning Theories Experimental Learning at Harvey Mudd Adapting the Lecture to an Audience Fostering Creativity The Correlation Between College Grades and Career Success The Future Enaineer-A View Fmm the Enditem User Systematic Curriculum Analysis Motivation and Learning-The
Vital Link
McElroy. Adams County School District W ~ d s o n Harvey . Mudd College Cosgrove, University of Cincinnati Brainard, University of Pittsburgh Stiee. University of Texas Stmng. Petro-Canada Feisel. South Dakota School of Mines Harrisberger. University of Alabama
Volume 57, Number 12, December 1980 1 851
seminar so that the idea can be discussed by everyone. For many of the faculty the Education Seminars are beginning to bring the excitement back to college teaching. New Faculty Workshop
The New Faculty Workshop is Put on in the beginning of each year, and i t is designed to provide a starting point in teaching for new faculty members in the way the Seminar Series was a starting point for the experienced faculty. The objectives of this part of the program are as follows: (a) T o begin to bridge the gap between the professional education and what is demanded in a college of a person who is teaching in that professional area; (b) to provide the new faculty with hackeround on the school. the students. and the curriculum: and rrJ to make it underitood immediately thut teaching is i m ~ ~ o r t nat n tCShl. It i i a11 too rommun that the tirst week at school for a new faculty member is spent filling out insurance and tax forms and securing research space, computer user numbers, and library priviledges. We think that shouldn't he the case a t an educational institution. A new faculty member bas to have time to do some of the tasks mentioned above, so the workshop is structured so that only two or three ideas are introduced which the faculty members can put to immediate use. One afternoon and morning is taken for the workshop; Table 2 is a typical schedule of events. The levels of learning talk is hased on a taxonomv of learnine develooed hv Blosser 11.2). The objectives calk is basedon ~ a ~ e rwork ' s (3). he talk on classroom methods is a svnthesis of three books on college teaching I1 61.Although noneot the prescntors i s m authority on educational matters, we've found that a talk [hat reviews what others have learned and includes your own examples and opinions is a good basis for discussions and work sessions. - T h e New h c u l t y Workshop has had some successes and problems. It does attract most of the new full-time faculty who have had teaching experience. Apparently these people better understand the value of such a workshop. From the comments on evaluations of the workshop we know that it creates a good initial impression of the school and that some of the ideas that are presented in the workshop are used. The problems occur before and after the workshop. We have not had much success in attracting instructors or advanced graduate students who assume a significant teaching load. These people have the least amount of experience and should have the greatest need for such a wurkshop. Attendanre at the workshop is not njandatrey hut wedo makean effurr tu personally invite all the new faculty. Also, a visit is made to the department heads to ask their help in making the workshop known to all the new faculty. Something special will have to be done to insure the attendance of this type of heginning faculty member. The other problem deals with the timing of the workshop. When classes begin everyone becomes so busy that neither the presenters or the participants can follow up on the ideas that were inTable 2.
The Schedule for a New Faculty Workshop Topic
traduced in the workshop. This year we are trying to formalize the follow up by presenting the first part of the workshop before classes start and then present the objectives portion and classroom methods portion in the first two weeks of the semester. It is too early to tell if the extended schedule will promote the desired follow-uo of the ideas without a decline in attendance. WorkshoD Seminars
The Seminar Series and New Faculty Workshop are intended to be a beeinnine of development. Thev are desiened to promote awareness &d stimulate interest. w e consider the next step to be a channeling of this interest into an in-depth study ofsome educational &pic. Preferably, this study would be a group activity so that when action was taken on an idea it coild be put into effect in a number of courses so that the educational concept had a greater impact and the results in the various courses could be comoared. This was the nhilnsophical motivation behind the workshop seminars. The topics for the worksho~sshould orobablv come from ideas oresented in the seminar 'Series. he objectives of the worksiop are as follows: (a) To provide an in-depth studv of a tonic of interest: (h) the ideas piesented should be able to be put'to immediate use: and (c) to provide the stimulus to create special studv and action groups. The structure of the workshops is still not com~letelvestablished. The question of who-presents the workshop has been estahlished. We desire an expert from outside the school whose work and talks have beenfollowed by more than one person so that there is a consensus on the value of the ideas. The two workshops that have been given were by Dr. Carl Durney of the University of Utah on Principles of Learning Psychology and Their Application and by Dr. James Stice of the University of Texas on Testing and Evaluation. The scheduling of the worksho~has not been established. The first workshophas scheduled for four hours on one afternoon and attendance was poor and the maioritv . .that did attend could not stay for thefull proceedings. In addition, this type of schedule did not allow for easy follow-up of the ideas presented. Consequently, the schedule of the second workshop was changed to three 90-minute sessions held two weeks apart. For this format it was strongly suggested to try out the ideas between sessions and report on the results. The results for the extended format were much better than the single afternoon session. The retention over the three sessions was good; the attendance averaged 25 people. Homework was done between the sessions and people were anxious to come back and discuss the results. Tv~icallv. .. - . the discussions in the workshops were a t a greater depth than those in the seminars. The one important objective that has not been attained in the workshops is the creation of faculty groups who are actively studying the application of the ideas presented in the workshops. More will be said on whether this objective can be attained in the Overall Assessment section.
Speakers
Parf
I.
Aftermn
Overview of the Schwi Situation Levels of Learning Work Session on Learning Levels Nuts and Bolts on Lectures and Discussions Social Hour
"Honest Administrator" Paveiich Pavelich, Sloan. and Wildernan Wildeman
Pan X Next Morning Breakfast and Haw to Get Things Dane at CSM Students. Curriculum, and Courses Using Learning Objectives Work Session on Objectives Summary of Ideas
852 1 Journal of Chemical Education
Pavelich, Sloan, and Wildernan Dean of Students Sloan Paveiich. Sloan, and Wildeman Pavelich, Sloan, and Wildeman
General Considerations
Two important aspects of a program such as this that have not been addressed in the previous sections are the selection of speakers and the cost of the program. The Colorado School of Mines is strictly a science and engineering school and thus has a reasonably narrow curriculum. All the speakers from on-campus listed in Table 1are scientists, engineers, or humanists, and all but two of the speakers from off-campus are in the same categories. The two people that put on the workshops are engineering professors. We find that the speakers that are the most effective fit the following profile: (a) they are scientists, engineers, or humanists; (b) thev have heen involved in an actual colleee uroeram of course revision, curriculum revision, or educational theory put into practice: and (c) thev are known to be effective soeakers. None bf the talks have been on the more mechanical aspects of
-. -
~
~
~
teaching such as how to prepare transparencies, how to schedule laboratories, or how to set up audio-visual equipment. There is a definite class of speaker that we have avoided, namely, the person typically associated with a School of Education. There are definite reasons for this situation which are not relatrd tn a hias on our varts. We find that .~ e o. p l in e Schools of Education do research on primary and secondary education and iew studs college teaching. Since rheir interest is in education at the-lowerlevels, it is difficult to directly apply the research results to a college course. On the other hand, the speakers we have scheduled have usually studied the theories and methods presented in Schools of Education, decided on a college course design based on that study, and are in a better position to present the ideas to a college faculty group. To give an example, our choice for a speaker is a chemistry professor who has studied the ideas of Piaget and applied them in a freshman chemistry course rather than an education professor whose research interest is the application of the ideas of Piaget to high school science courses. 'I'herr: is a real cost for this program; it cannot run as a stricdy volunt~ereffort. An impurrant wason ibr establishing a real cost ii that the explicit approval of the program by the administration is essential for success. If real mmey is pro\icled for refreshments and outside sueakers. this is an cx~lirit form of approval. If release from committee assignments or teachine time is also vossihle. this is another exnlicit form of approval. Furthermore, we've found that the actual dollars needed to run our develooment Dromam are not excessive. so it's a small investment>ompa>eduto the benefit. For the Seminar Series, costs have averaged $1600 per year. This includes $400 forrefreshments and$1200 foitraiel and honoraria for off-campus speakers. For the New Faculty Workshop $100 for refreshments and $200 for hooks is required. For the first two years, the faculty members who presented the workshop were paid consulting fees totaling $1200 per year. For the extended format for the Workshop Seminar the costs are $600 for consulting fees, $1500 for travel, and $100 for refreshments. For all portions of the program the time of the faculty on-campus has been volunteered.
instill those attributes in our students. Members of the faculty that are active in the Faculty Development Program are also the people that are on the committees that are making these hroad curricular changes. The objective of professional development as an educator has also been achieved to some extent. Mines has heen a predominantly undergraduate institution, so there has always been a commitment to teaching competence. Since the introduction of the Faculty Development Program, the administration has shown that it will accent . ~rofessionaldevelonment in the field of education research as a route for promotion. Research and publishing in a discinline is not the onlv eauee ~rofessionaldeveloument. " of . Research and publishing can be in the area of advancements in college teaching. The one cause for concern that the authors now have that was unforeseen in the beginning is the slow Dace at which educational concepts are put into gcneral use once they are ncce~red.Enthusiasm fur the ideas presented in the seminars is high hut little has been done by faculty groups to formally introduce these ideas into courses on a broad scale. Cousequently, there are no study or action groups that have been formed as a result of the Development Program. Professors will trv the ideas on an informal basis in the intimacv of their classrooms, but generally they do not want to commit themselves to involvement in hroad-scale chanees. It is our ovinion that changes within a whole department or institution will reouire more than the -oromams that are outlined in this paper. Although we cannot point to large-scale education projects that are a result of our efforts, we are convinced that the program has developed within the faculty a positive attitude about their role as teachers. People are willing to discuss changes in teaching methods or course design and are anxious to find out how things are tried in other departments. They generally greet the prospect of major curriculum changes with a positive attitude rather than with suspicion. The faculty generally finds Mines a good place to teach and feels that stimulating things are happening in education a t the school. The Faculty Development Program is largely responsible for this attitude.
Overall Assessment Our original ohjectives for the program were stated in the introduction of the paper. An assessment of the program will first he made with regard to those ohjectives. There have also been some unforeseen successes and problems and those will also be discussed. The first obiective was to aenerate a nucleus of facultv memheri who are actively wncerned ahout college education Thii may have hem achieved. This conclusion is hnsed on the estimate that the three originatorsof the programcould now Dull out of active Ieadershir) and there would 111. pnmle willine to take up the position. he hope was for a cork ofahout 2 c but there are perhaps 10 faculty members who are doing the planning and-executing. Although the nucleus is small, the influence that these people have on educational matters on an institutional level is substantial. Mines has undertaken an extensive program to determine the attributes that its graduates should have and the curriculum will he revised to try to
Acknowledgment The funds for the program were provided by the VicePresident for Academic Affairs from a gift from the Hallihurton Foundation. The administrative encouragement and help of Dr. James Gary and Dr. William Mueller have been essential to the success of the program. Virginia Way helped us design the original proposal and guided us through the first year. Her help was essential to getting things started.
.
--
Literature Cited 111 Blnner,P.E."HaodbwkofElfectiveQuostioniwT~hnipuos?EducalionA~eiatos. Inc.,WorthinSon, Ohio. 1973,86 pp. 121 Pavelich. M. J.. J. CHEM. EDUC.. i n press. (31 M a w . R.F., "Prepariw Instructional Obje~five=,"FearonPublishers, Palo Alto. California. 1962.60pp. (4 M~eKeachie,W. J.."TeaehingTips. A Guid~bookfor the ~ e g i n n i n gCdlege T ~ ~ C ~ ~ 6th ed.,D.C.Heath and Co., Lexington, Msisaehuretts, 1969.280pp. I51 Bligh, D. E., "What's the Use of Lectures?." 3rd ed., Penguin Books, New York,
?.
,099
(61 Eble. D., "The Craft of Teaching: 1917, L79pp.
h e y - B a s s publisher^. Ssn Francisco. California.
Volume 57. Number 12, December 1980 1 853
, " .
